Nikon Coolscan 5000 Slide Scanner

Hi J. Harrington, I can't answer your question, but would like to suggest that perhaps you might want to ask it over in the film forum. A man from B&H Photo, Henry Posner, seems to participate there frequently. There's a currently active thread, "B&H Film Today" and I'm sure he participated. Others in the film forum may have some insight too. I hope this is only temporary on Nikon's part as I'm a film lover.

J.,
This really surprised me too. I thought that with canon and minolta dropping out of the market, Nikon was the only option. I can only assume this is a pure "business" decision. I'm guessing that even though they were likely a profitable item, there was no growth projected - therefore it was only a question of when, not if, this product would be discontinued. Nikon decided now was better than later.
It is a lot of change in an incredibly short time. Last week I went to a reunion party for a lab I worked at for 13 years in MPLS, Photos, inc. The lab was in business from 1965 -2003 - almost 40 years - basically doing the same thing, printing from some kind of negative, onto some kind of photographic paper. In the seven years since, the photofinishing industry has essentially disappeared. The company that bought Photos, inc. just shut down their film processors a couple months ago.
Fortunately I own a Nikon 5000! You've had many helpful posts on this topic over the years, and I thank you for that. I hope your business can survive this change.
Noritsu makes a decent film scanner in the 10K-15K range, for unmounted film only. Slide "scanning" can be accomplished via digital SLR & slide copying attachment, though digital ice is lost. The glory days of film scanning seem to be over.

I hate to be a wet blanket, but that does not bode well for the future. The only other scanner that's even worth looking at for 35mm is the Plustek series, and while decent, they are no CoolScans. Flatbeds are worthless for 35mm scanning.

Lack of solid, affordable scanning options will be a large blow against film use for professionals and serious amateurs. Let's face it, most lab scans suck, and most people will never again see a color darkroom. B&W can fall back on relatively easy to setup and maintain B&W darkrooms. But if the CoolScan 9000 goes away it will be like kicking a leg out from under the chair holding up what's left of serious color film use. Losing the 5000 is a big blow in itself.

I wonder if the ebay prices are more a reflection of a panic response ('I can never get this again!') vs. year over year demand?

I agree with Daniel.

It was on the cards. I suspect Nikon just cannot be bothered with the small revenue they get from them from this whole separate line of business. The 9000 will be next.

I have the Canon 4000FS. That only lasted about 18 months with Canon. I think in the future maybe we should buy a copying stand and macro lens and use a DSLR for "scanning" work.

Any thoughts on why Nikon would discontinue the 5000?

Yes, actually. I first became interested in photography in the early nineties, and can still remember what their ads said back then. I think the then current line-up was the F-4, F-3, FM-2n, N8008s, N6006, and maybe a few others, perhaps including one of their first digital cameras. Plus, the scanners. And I also remember that they described these scanners as, "Bridging the gap to the future", or something to that extent, which struck me as very curious... As if it were pre-ordained that digital would be their future. With everything that I've personally experienced, and the cynicism about profit that's come over the years, my opinion is that digital, with its frequent model changes, is simply a much more profitable business model. By withdrawing the more affordable scanners, Nikon is forcing all the remaining holdouts, and potential newbies to film, into their much more profitable business plan. Sadly, this has happened as more and more people that I have contact with personally, and, that I also read about here, have awakened to the world of film photography.

Jeff,

You wrote: By withdrawing the more affordable scanners, Nikon is forcing all the remaining holdouts, and potential newbies to film, into their much more profitable business plan.

That assumes most of the Nikon 5000 scanner users were current film users, and it assumes that all those using film today want their film digitized.

I suspect the vast majority of the Nikon 5000 scanner use was/is to digitize film shot long before digital cameras were available.

J., Okay, you're saying that most scanning today is being done on film shot before the plague... I would guess you're in a better position than I to make that judgement, and I don't disagree. What I'm seeing in my small circle- and admittedly, I make no claim that this is a representative sample- is that I'm talking to many young people that are interested in film, and I know that some of them have recently purchased film cameras. They seem to be tired of the "buy the latest and greatest!" line. And, older folks like me that never abondoned film, and see it's advantages (for our needs and situations), are just as enthusiastic as ever.

I've been shooting young musicians lately with film, and they love the results. At first they looked at me like I was as obsolete as they'd been lead to believe film was. After seeing the results they all want me to photograph them. There's nothing serious that I need to do photographically that I can't do using film, and do well, and scanning opens up a whole 'nuther world. So, yes, I think that this taking away of the more affordable scanner model is part of the business plan on Nikon's part. Digital camera selling is much more profitable than the retailing of new film cameras. '80s and early '90s era film bodies have all the features I need for quality still photography, and this fact don't make 'nuff dough, so...

I doubt whether scanners would be discontinued as part of some arcane business strategy to force people into digital. As well as Mr Harrington's valid point , there is the possibility that those people so forced would buy another brand.

Realistically we have to assume I think that somewhere in Nikon a case has been put forward that these scanners are not satisfactorily profitable. But thats where the fun starts, for in my experience of continue/discontinue decisions, and I have a lot, its possible to look at a set of numbers and draw entirely different conclusions depending primarily on just how fixed you fixed costs are - in short the profitability of a product line can be made to look as good or bad as the vested interests inside the company want. The pity is that if they increased the price to the point that profitability was not a debate, the chances are that their sales might not have dropped that much.

David, When I read those ads years ago, the wording, "Bridging the gap to the future"- or words to that extent- I can't help but think that this may well have been the plan all along. Especially when one considers the seemingly inherent rapid upgrade cycles that seem to go with digital... Much more profitable from a bottom line standpoint, no? And I don't mean to denigrate the many virtues of digital capture for many people- not at all. It's just that I feel that film photography has its own unique virtues and advantages, and that these vested interests would rather see it go away.

As well as Mr Harrington's valid point , there is the possibility that those people so forced would buy another brand.

No offense, but what is currently comparable to these Coolscans? I don't think anyone knowledgeable would say that there is an equivalent product at a similar price point.

I wouldn't disagree with the rest of what you say, and believe it relates with what I said.